media-I devote my life to thee-who doesn't?

media brainwashes people.
didn't you know?

Even though we are taught that the news industry delivers unbiased news that tells the audience what to the fact are rather than what they mean exactly.

so clearly the media is just out to brainwash people.
But how can the media be brainwashing people when it is giving them what they want. It is there for their entetainment and not something forced on people. If they don't want to see it, they can turn it off.

If the newspaper really disappears within the next 40 years as is predicted, I will be very sad. there is just something so much more interesting and intellectual about sitting and reading a paper. That tangible sensation provides something that the internet and broadcasting cannot.
Maybe we just need to be more like Britain and write more about celebrities to go along with big news around the world (not just local issues that get real boring). The two combined, rather than seperate as we generally see them, would not only provide more entertainment but through providing entertainment, more reading of the news.

Maybe if we lived in a place where public transportation were bigger (how I love riding the tube with my London newspaper in hand) people would be more inclined to grab a paper to go in the morning.

In reality we do spend a lot of our time with media. Our media is part of what connects our broad nation though. It may help make everyone similar through big advertising corporations and seeing the same movies and reading bestselling books, but it also establishes a tie between the people across the United States.

(p.s. It's pop not soda)

Christmas.

Good King Wenceslaus looked out on the feast of Stephen.
When the snow lay round about, deep and crisp and even.
Brightly shone the moon that night, though the frost was cruel,
when a poor man came in sight, gathering winter fuel.

that's right. I know the words.

Ode to the lawn mower

I don't like lawnmowers. I never have.
They are loud and seem to make everyone in my family miserable with red eyes and runny noses.
I am the only one who has escaped this fate and so I have limited excuses not to do it.
My question is, whatever happened to the good ol' push lawn mowers. Not the riding lawn mowers, but the push ones? You get a workout and you have better control.
I hate the riding lawn mower. I had to mow the lawn when I was younger and you know what happened, I couldn't reach. That's right. I was that small, period.
Here's what happens when you are too small: First, you have to figure out how to start the thing, leaning forward to the ignition while still keeping enough weight on the seat so that the bloody machine doesn't shut off (a handy safety feature for those who are not small). For me, this means I have to stretch my leg way out to reach the peddle, sitting as far back as possible, while reaching all the way forward to the keys with my arm. The reach is just far enough that IT SUCKS. Suddenly, I do want to be like Mike.
Once I finally get the thing going, it turns out that reaching the pedals again is practically impossible. Which means I'm going at one speed. END OF STORY. The gas and the brakes are useless.
So, when this happens and I am rolling down a hill straight for the giant trampoline, in this giant thing that turns like a moose, I panic. I can't reach the peddle, I can't get it to turn. Bailing out didn't even come into my mind until I'd already made contact. That's right. On a riding lawn mower I ran into our trampoline. You would think it not possible, but I did it. Not only did I hit it, but I still couldn't stop it so I kept pushing it...Finally it came to a stop when I was so stressed I started bouncing on the seat looking around for some solution. THANK YOU SAFETY FEATURE.
I immediately got off and went and told my dad I was done. I haven't mowed a lawn since.
And that's why I love the riding lawn mower.

"You're confused? So am I, honey. I'm really mixed"
-line from the Professional Returner ala acting 181

Ethics

Ethically, I have no idea what is right.
I wish there was a clear answer to everything, but really I have no idea.
I don't know if I think deontoligically, teleologically, or like an egalitarian. It seems that in reality we all use a combination of these based on our situations.
is it possible to just avoid it all, and always choose to do nothing? Can that be my ethics? Or what if I feel like just being an open forum kind of where you just bring up issues you aren't sure of with others to see what they think...That's what I'd do.
When I was little, I was a tattle-tail. My brother and sister were always getting me into trouble, so I just happened to return the favor. Eventually we all got to a point where we all get along, and keep each others secrets from our parents.
Rather than being torn between looking out for my little brother and keeping our bond by not "tattling" I generally find that I try to be as oblivious as possible to what he is doing.
If he doesn't tell me straight out, I don't know what's going on and hope for the best.
What kind of ethics is that?
familial ethics?
And then what happens when you are trying to stay oblivious but someone else drags you, say your parent? And tells you what your sibling has been doing.
What kind of ethics is that?
"Parents can do what they want" ethics?

I get confused.
no more ethics.

DISCLAIMER: my brother is not a bad person and has not done anything bad in my opinion and I'm not saying my parents are bad people. They're good people. Happy family. The end.

Teacher Oppression and Eminem

Through our exercise in class it was easy to feel the power and rush of being the oppressor, the issue was, we ourselves were immediately repressed for doing just that.
The woman from the office next door crushed any power we had built up, I believe making it hard for us to talk about it.
What would have happened though if we then turned our power back at her "SILENCE", "GO HOME", "TORCH THE HALL"?
it could have made for a very interesting day of oppression on top of oppression.

When we discussed symbolic reversal in class, slightly embarrassing, but all I could think of was the Eminem movie. When the rappers compete they usually tear each other down, but Eminem turned it around and described himself, tore himself down. By doing this he left his opponent without anything to say, and thus made the personal attack a positive thing, in a way. It made more sense in my head. But yeah.

Rhetoric: a science and philosophical

Science is involved with rhetoric because you have to know how people function, how their brains work, what their needs are, in order to fully effect them with rhetoric. The nature of human beings and how they scientifically work becomes a large factor in how you address people rhetorically. Not only do you have to understand how to control yourself and your message when speaking, but you need to know how to effect your audience. If you understand the needs and actions of your audience and how they function, you can more readily target them with your message, and form your message around them. How messages, how rhetoric is received is in itself a scientific process that one must fully understand and utilize.

Philosophy goes beyond science to understand more than just how people think, but what they think and how concepts form and change. Though this could be considered a scientific approach if you focus on the psychological, brain-functioning part, philosophy goes beyond that, to reach people in ways that they haven't understood or known before. Philosophy makes people think about things they have never thought about before, effects people in new ways. This is how rhetoric is like philosophy. A major function of rhetoric is to persuade and to persuade one must be able to reach people in ways beyond their basic needs and thought processes, but in their emotions, in their dreams, in their own individual thoughts.
Rhetoric has scientific and philosophical factors.

Present with pizazz

Without a good delivery, messages are lost by people focusing more on mistakes or bad delivery. But bad delivery does not just comes from someone who does not use their nonverbals effectively. Though these people would be shaking or sweating, chewing gum or even lacking something simple like using gestures to emphasize parts of the speech, bad delivery could also come from someone with overemphasis on the wrong parts, changing their tone to emphasize the wrong parts and so forth, making it less clear to the audience what is most important.

When one speaks, not only is it important that the message is clear and key parts are emphasized, but that the audience can connect. This is where the pizazz comes in. Style is how you formulate as well as present your message. Passion and knowledge of ethos, logos, and pathos are used to evoke something inside of the audience, to draw them into the message and outside of their self in a way. Pizazz is about taking the audience somewhere they have never been, feel something they have never felt, and even connect with the speaker and new concepts.

When I think of pizazz and delivery I think of MLK Jr. In his time he gave some very powerful speeches, to connect people with the concept that all men are created equal. He connected with his audiences, talked about how he was like everyone else, yet he was able to effect great numbers of people to see that changes needed to be made. His speeches were emotional, logical, and definitely connected to the audience, but more importantly, they were passionate. Not only was it a topic he cared a lot about, but he presented with passion, bringing that feeling to everyone else. He also had excellent delivery, able to emphasize important points for the audience and bring his message to others not only clearly, but strongly.
Pizazz is how changes are made. Pizazz is how minds are changed, and he had it.

Ancient Dudes

Rhetoric biggest use was to influence state affairs.
But without technology and inventions such as mass produced paper and printing, (or TV or internet), arguments had to be made orally. Arguments on issues, like measure 48, would have to be presented orally as it was the only means of sharing the information with a broad audience. This means that there was more of a focus on presentation and appearance, since things couldn't be visually altered. Also an emphasis was noted on clarity and especially volume.
But other emphasis was still key in persuading and informing others. Emotional appeals were noted, as were logical ties to prove points, as well as the importance of knowing your audience and connected to them.
Examples and facts were noted as key to arguments and understanding and having knowledge about what you argue. It was even noted that all rhetoric was not good, as it was possible to use it to benefit individuals instead of to reveal the truth. Ethics then comes into play as key to a good rhetorician according to Aristotle.
Many of their thoughts and understandings about the art of rhetoric are still used today, in every form of persuasive medium.
These were some smart dudes.

ancient dudes

rhetoric's biggest use was to influence state affairs.
But without technology and inventions such as mass produced paper and printing, (or TV or internet), arguments had to be made orally. Arguments on issues, like measure 48, would have to be presented orally as it was the only means of sharing the information with a broad audience.
This means that there was more of a focus on presentation and appearance. Also an emphasis on clarity and especially volume.
But other emphasis was still key in persuading and informing others. Emotional appeals were noted, as were logical ties to prove points, as well as the importance of knowing your audience and connected to them.
Examples and facts were noted as key to arguments and understanding and having knowledge about what you argue.
many of their thoughts and understandings about the art of rhetoric are still used today, in every form of persuasive medium.
These were some smart dudes.

As I side note to my last blog, I am of legal drinking age, am not a regular drinker and most definitly not an alcoholic. Just wanted to clarify that.

what's a rhetoric?

Rhetoric to me is like oratory...oratory to me means Italy...and Italy means wine. But I don't think rhetoric means wine. But maybe it should...
rhetoric is what you use when you want to speak, use words either to share something or to convince someone of something.
When I think of rhetoric I think of someone (usually someone ancient first) standing in front of a group of people and trying to convince them or teach them something.
The more I think about it though, it can be any oral encounter where you are speaking to one person. Arguing and convincing someone aren't the only things rhetoric can do. Teaching and informing are also major part of rhetoric.
Rhetoric generally uses arguments with reason and logic to make points clear. Rhetoric can not only change minds, but inspire actions.
Thus Rhetoric is every add you have ever seen.
anymore, with visuals and music, words aren't even essential other than to tell you what the exact brand is of what you want.
And I want Yellowtail Merlot.